I always considered solipsism as viewing other people as a potential extension of your own consciousness, as it is impossible to know whether or not another person is truly real from your own point of view. And so, I guess I view it as a philosophy where everything could be considered possibly as a piece of yourself, as a part of your imagination; nothing else but your own mind is guaranteed to exist. It's quite a surreal thing to think about.

From what I have witnessed, the red pill seems to interpret solipsism as something completely different, and that it acts more as a synonym for selfishness or being narrow-minded. That seems like quite a leap from the philosophical definition and I honestly have no idea whether or not my interpretation is right or how the word could make such a leap within a group of people.

Surely it would be better to just call self-centred people self-centred? From my point of view, labeling people solipsists seems out of place considering its usage. I don't think viewing yourself as the only potentially real being in your own world necessarily means you have to be completely egocentric.

I have, at times, felt as if nothing was real - that I was wandering through a dream state, and so I guess I experience solipsism sporadically. I have never felt compelled to become mindlessly selfish during these episodes and it hasn't really affected other people in my life. Typically, I respond to it by being more reserved and observant, and maybe occasionally a bit confused.

So I wonder, how do you define solipsism, and why do you define it the way you do?